Democrats
Obama: Short on experience, good organizer, smart and sparkling with charisma. Winner.
Clinton: Long on experience and smart, but charisma of a sewer commissioner. Loser.
Edwards: Medium experience, smart, some charisma but ultimately lightweight. Loser.
Richardson: Long on experience, short on name recognition, so little charisma that I can barely remember what he looks like. Loser.
Kucinich: Can't even spell the crazy bastard's name. Loser.
Republicans
McCain: Long on experience and older than grandpa. Loser.
Romney: Artificial intelligence. Loser.
Guiliani: The more you know him, the less you like him. Loser.
Huckabee: Medium domestic experience, foreign policy moron, high on charisma, but completely crazy and believes in Adam and Eve. Loser.
Thompson: Needs frequent naps. Loser.
Ron Paul: Utterly bugfuck. Loser.
And there you have it. If I left anyone out, it means I couldn't remember them. In other words: loser.
Posts
5 comments:
Obama Baracks my world.
By the way, Best McCain photo.... EVER!!
Having thought about this, I'm going to go ahead and crawl all the way out to the tippy-tip of the limb and stay with this. For the Democrats, it's all probably going to come down to California, where a number of elections have been made or lost.
Either way, Clinton or Obama make strong candidates. In comparison with the alternatives. I just think I, like many, am weary of the Bill and Hill Variety Hour: I never want to hear the goddamn words "blue dress" ever again.
I'm going out on the limb with you, and maybe going a bit farther. I'm predicting a Clinton/Obama ticket. CAW
Your prediction makes political sense in many ways, would work well for both candidates, and would be a really strong ticket...but I'm getting the feeling a stadium would be too small a room for those two. Could be wrong, though.
Post a Comment